1 And he told them a parable, to the effect that they ought always to pray and not lose heart.

Continuing the last stage of Jesus’s ministry before his final week in Jerusalem before his death, Jesus in Luke 18 begins the parable of the Unjust Judge which is unique to Luke’s collection of parables. Luke also gives us the meaning of the parable in the second part of the verse, it is to explain to them to always pray and not lose heart. To be persistent in prayer. Not all parable characters are to have divine counterparts like the prodigal son’s father being God. This parable as we will see is using the ‘from the lesser to the greater rhetorical method’. Another example of this teaching style is Luke 11:11-13 where Jesus points out that earthly flawed fathers can give gifts to their child so how much more could a heavenly father do?

2 He said, “In a certain city there was a judge who neither feared God nor regarded man;

Jesus begins with establishing the main character of the parable, a judge who did not fear God and did not care about the people he presided over. In first-century Jewish society, judges were expected to serve as administrators of justice, often resolving disputes, addressing community grievances, and interpreting the Torah to guide their decisions. Judges were particularly responsible for protecting the rights of the vulnerable, such as widows and orphans, in accordance with biblical principles (Deuteronomy 16:18-20). So already this judge is off to a bad start.

3 and there was a widow in that city who kept coming to him and saying, ‘Vindicate me against my adversary.’

A widow in the same city repeatedly approaches this judge requesting he vindicates her against her adversary, meaning her legal opponent or accuser. Widows in first-century Jewish society were among the most vulnerable. Without a male guardian (husband or son), they had little means to protect themselves legally or socially so she is entirely dependent on the judge to justify her.

4 For a while he refused; but afterward he said to himself, ‘Though I neither fear God nor regard man,

He refuses her repeated requests but eventual gives in despite the fact he does not fear or or care about people.

5 yet because this widow bothers me, I will vindicate her, or she will wear me out by her continual coming.’ ”

The judge is explicitly justifying her because selfish motives and although the text says “she will wear me out” it could be translating as “she will strike me” but either way the meaning is the same. He is ruling in her favour because of his own self interest in not be irritated by her persistence.

6 And the Lord said, “Hear what the unrighteous judge says

Luke then introduces Jesus’ next phrase by calling him Lord “and the Lord said” the greek word used here is kyrios, it means supreme in authority and is typically only used for God. Luke’s word choice indicates the divinity of Jesus. This divine labeling of Jesus adds to the gravity of authority his next words hold and also introduces the lesser to greater rhetorical method, “Hear what the unrighteous judge says” is to be contrasted with the following verses about God.

7 And will not God vindicate his elect, who cry to him day and night? Will he delay long over them?

From the lesser to the greater, if an unrighteous judge who does not fear God and does not regard man vindicates someone in the persistent requests, will not God who is completely righteous and loving vindicate those who cry to him both day and night? Is he likely to delay by his own standards? These are rhetorical questions but illustrate Jesus’ point but he still clarifies in the following verse.

8 I tell you, he will vindicate them speedily. Nevertheless, when the Son of man comes, will he find faith on earth?”

After clarifying that God will vindicate those who are persistent in their pleading to him speedily, Jesus put’s out another question that eludes to his previous eschatological statements in chapter 17. Jesus has just described the ideal persistent prayer framework required for his disciples but he questions whether or not he will find that type of faith on earth when he “comes”. What is not clear is whether or not the arrival of the son of man is about Jesus earthly life or the eschatological era of the son of man that he spoke about in the chapter previous. If it is not about the future day of the son of man, it seems like a pointless question but in the context of it being in the future it makes more sense. Especially when we remember this time of the son of man is one of judgement and is reminiscent of the flood during the time of Noah. Now the legal component of the parable and God be relayed as a just judge would be more coherent. The people who are vindicated through persistent prayer might be the same people who escape the incoming judgement of the era of the son of man.

Jesus has just corrected the Pharisees perception about the Kingdom of God, saying it is already here but they cannot see it with their senses, that it already dwells among them, Jesus most likely referring to himself as the Kingdom as he has elsewhere said he is the Temple also. He then turned to his disciples and prophesied of the coming days of the Son of Man, the divine Messianic figure spoken of by the prophet Daniel. These days will be divinely orchestrated, obvious to the senses and sudden. It is following this that Jesus begins in verse 26.

26 As it was in the days of Noah, so will it be in the days of the Son of man.

Jesus compares the future he is speaking about to past events. The days of Noah referencing Genesis 5:28 – 9:29 which tells the story of Noah, a prophet whom God makes a covenant, instructs to build an ark to protect his family from a divinely orchestrated flood. This flood was to cleanse the earth of it’s sin which had be made manifest by the free will of creatures. We can see the elements of both purifying and saving but also destruction and judgement in the days of Noah.

27 They ate, they drank, they married, they were given in marriage, until the day when Noah entered the ark, and the flood came and destroyed them all.

Here Jesus illustrates how it will be like the days of Noah. People will go on about their lives ignoring the warnings of prophets continuing to eat, drink and marry, essentially living like a future of the land they are in will exist and not be destroyed. So will the people of Israel until 70 AD when God uses the Roman empire to destroy the Temple scatter his people throughout the world.

28 Likewise as it was in the days of Lot—they ate, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they built,

Jesus compares the event in his prophecy to another well known divine orchestrated destruction event, in the days of Lot, Abraham’s Nephew, once again people living for a future that will not exist and if they paid attention to the warnings they would leave these lives of theirs in order to save them.

29 but on the day when Lot went out from Sodom fire and sulphur rained from heaven and destroyed them all—

The moment Lot leaves, because he listened to the warnings,the condemned city of Sodom received divine judgement from the skies as fire and sulphur destroy it. It is also important once again to note the events being initiated by God are acts of judgement of an unclean people rife with sin.

30 so will it be on the day when the Son of man is revealed.

When the son of man is revealed, the word of revealed is “apokalyptō” this is the root of our word apocalypse and as it is used here, its meaning is unveiling something that is hidden. This speaks to the full nature of Christ, to many during his ministry he was a healer, a prophet and even a nuisance but no earthly individual has yet to comprehend his full identity except maybe for Peter but even he did not figure that out on his own and also it was really only in name only. The full substance of Christ was yet to be revealed. This would happen in the future era that would come after his death, resurrection and ascension.

31 On that day, let him who is on the housetop, with his goods in the house, not come down to take them away; and likewise let him who is in the field not turn back.

In this moment of divine judgement people on their rooftops should not retrieve their possessions on the way out of escaping the city as is related to Lot escape Sodom. This phrase might come of as unusual because of how modern western housing is considered but houses where Jesus lives were different in layout. Possessions would be inside the house (obviously) there would be an external staircase or ladder to a flat roof that people would relax on, kind of the equivalent to a garden seating area so he is saying those on the roof should leave by the staircase, not go back into their home and just leave.

“In Jesus’ day, houses often had flat roofs, accessed by ladders or external stairs. The urgency of Jesus’ message is emphasized by the imagery: when judgment comes, there is no time to go down and retrieve anything, not even to descend to safety from the roof” (Wright, Jesus and the Victory of God, p. 432).

Those who are out in the fields should not turn back to the doomed city. Fields were located outside of the city limits which were limited to trade, governance and temple activities. Keener also comments on the geographic layout: “Fields were typically located outside the walled cities, and the instruction to not return reflects the suddenness and finality of the judgment about to fall” (Keener, Bible Background Commentary, p. 156).

32 Remember Lot’s wife. 33 Whoever seeks to gain his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life will preserve it.

As a warning Jesus refers back to Lot’s wife who is killed because she turns and looks back at the city. This emphasizes the graveness of these warnings. He is firmly establishing those who look back will die. He then follows it with a teaching that elsewhere has been left in a state of interpretive mystery but here in this placement gives clarification to its literal meaning. “Whoever seeks to gain his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life will preserve it”. In this context we can clearly see the literal meaning being “your life as you know it is coming to an end, if you cling to it you will lose it but if you leave and embrace a new life you will not die, for example, refuse to leave the condemned city you live in? you will die, you cannot stop what is coming you will simply be taken up in the destruction but if you abandon this life, move somewhere else, you will not suffer in that particular event.

34 I tell you, in that night there will be two in one bed; one will be taken and the other left.

Jesus begins with “I tell you”, he is prophesying a future event. The text itself is referring to a domestic setting where two are in one “bed” but the greek word used is klinē. First century hebrews did not have the same family conventions as we do. John Nolland (in his commentary on Luke) points out that klinē was not just a bed for sleeping but a space for reclining during meals in a communal setting, and it was typical for such furniture to be placed in the main room of the house ​Bible Backgrounds. With this in mind we can go back a few verses to those “eating” up until judgement and we can see that Jesus is referring to those common life activities but something happens, one is “taken” and another is left. The greek word is paralambanō which based on it’s biblical usage is perceived as something positive not negative. For example when Jesus is “receiving” his disciples or when Jesus “takes” people to himself (John 14:3). Another within this same family home will be left (aphiēmi) . Considering the previous statements by Jesus, the context is about getting away from a city that is going to be destroyed so combining the positive use elsewhere of paralambano with that, those who are taken are the ones preserved from the punishment and those that are left are not. This connects very coherently with Jesus’ earlier teaching about a family house being divided Luke 12:51-53, with some who are loyal to Jesus’s kingdom and others who are not.

Keener (Bible Background Commentary): Keener explains that while the Mosaic covenant was national in scope, Jesus’ kingdom is universal but individual in its application. The shift from a corporate to a personal response means that not all members of a family will necessarily enter the kingdom of God, as the decision to follow Jesus is one that must be made individually, regardless of familial ties.

Jesus has corrected the perception on who will receive the kingdom (Matthew 5:1-11 the beatitudes) but now he is correcting the perception on who will escape future events of divine catastrophe and in both cases the jewish mainstream opinion is wrong.

35 There will be two women grinding together; one will be taken and the other left.”

Same division as before but now in the context of those who are working in the fields or elsewhere. Those who are obedient, who have faith will not question the warning they will just up and leave whereas the others will carry on eating, drinking and working until the judgement arrives

37 And they said to him, “Where, Lord?” He said to them, “Where the body is, there the eagles will be gathered together.”

When the disciples ask, “Where, Lord?” they may be inquiring about the location of the judgment or the gathering of the “taken” ones. Jesus’ cryptic reply about the body and eagles suggests that the location will be self-evident when the time comes. Ezekiel 39:17-20 describes birds and animals feasting on the flesh of fallen armies, symbolizing divine judgment on the wicked. Jesus’ use of similar imagery may evoke this apocalyptic picture for His audience.

The Greek word aetoi can mean either “eagles” or “vultures.” In this context, it likely refers to scavenging birds drawn to a corpse. This imagery conveys the idea that judgment follows sin as naturally and inevitably as vultures follow death.

N.T Wright interprets the saying in the historical context of the Roman destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. The “body” represents the corrupt city, and the “eagles” signify the Roman legions ​Bible Backgrounds

20 Being asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God was coming, he answered them, “The kingdom of God is not coming with signs to be observed;

The phrase Kingdom of God reflects a central theme in Jesus’ teachings. Here, Jesus clarifies that the kingdom is not coming with “observation” (παρατηρήσεως) (par-at-ay’-ray-sis), a term implying outward spectacle or visible markers. Jesus counters the common Jewish expectation of a visible, nationalistic kingdom.

N.T. Wright states, “For the Pharisees, the kingdom would come when Israel’s God defeated her enemies and vindicated his people” (Jesus and the Victory of God, p. 205).

In The Jewish War, Josephus notes that the Pharisees saw the kingdom as a coming event involving divine signs and a future Messiah who would liberate Israel from Roman rule (Josephus, Jewish War, 2.8.14)

21 nor will they say, ‘Lo, here it is!’ or ‘There!’ for behold, the kingdom of God is in the midst of you.”

Here Jesus uses negative conditional phrasing “nor will they say” which depends on the prior statement. They will not see conclusive material observable signs (verse 20, this is what the Pharisees expect) nor will they hear them. This clarifies that the material senses are blind to it, a possible conclusion is that revelation requires the eyes of faith.

This phrase at the end of verse 21 is often debated, as ἐντὸς ὑμῶν (entos hymon) could mean “within you” or “among you.” The latter is more plausible in context, with Jesus pointing to the kingdom as a present reality in his ministry rather than an inward spiritual state.

Craig Keener comments that this phrase indicates Jesus’ identity and presence as the Kingdom’s embodiment among the people, suggesting a profound shift from a future expectation to an immediate reality (Bible Background Commentary, p. 340).

22 And he said to the disciples, “The days are coming when you will desire to see one of the days of the Son of man, and you will not see it.

Now Jesus turns to his disciples. Scholars suggest he is changing the subject to discuss eschatology but this isn’t necessarily true if the incarnation, prophecy and eschatology are intimately connected but events themselves being in time could happen separately. Hēmera is the word used for days and is used typically to define an era. The era of the son of man is coming, the divine messianic figure from Daniel and although connected to the Kingdom, that is already here the era of the son of man is not here yet. So this suggests certain future events will take place at a different time. The disciples in their lack of knowledge might want to see this era but they will not see it themselves.

23 And they will say to you, ‘Lo, there!’ or ‘Lo, here!’ Do not go, do not follow them.

The warning against following signs and wonders or physical locations speaks against both false messianic claimants and the desire for visual proof. This relates to Deuteronomy 13:1-3, where followers are warned against prophets or signs that may lead them astray.

Darrell Bock emphasizes this caution against “external verification” of the kingdom’s arrival, as Jesus redirects focus to himself and his mission (Bock, Luke, p. 1402).

24 For as the lightning flashes and lights up the sky from one side to the other, so will the Son of man be in his day.

The comparison to lightning highlights the sudden, unmistakable, and universal nature of the Son of Man’s coming. The use of ἀστραπὴ (lightning) conveys rapid visibility, emphasizing that although kingdom’s arrival is already here unbeknownst to them this oncoming era of the Son of man’s days will not be hidden or gradual. This aligns with Daniel 7:13-14, where the “Son of Man” arrives with authority. This link would resonate with a Jewish audience familiar with Daniel’s prophecy, reflecting Jesus’ eschatological role.

This lightning imagery to us might just appear as a reference to its visibility and instantaneousness of future signs but the old testament context which second temple judaism lived and breathed would not be able to ignore the divine threads these descriptors are woven with. These are explicitly used in theophanies.

Exodus 19:16 “On the morning of the third day there were thunders and lightnings and a thick cloud on the mountain and a very loud trumpet blast, so that all the people in the camp trembled.”

Psalm 18:12-14 “Out of the brightness before him hailstones and coals of fire broke through his clouds. The Lord also thundered in the heavens, and the Most High uttered his voice, hailstones and coals of fire. And he sent out his arrows and scattered them; he flashed forth lightnings and routed them.”

Psalm 97:4 “His lightnings light up the world; the earth sees and trembles.” Ezekiel 1:13-14 “As for the likeness of the living creatures, their appearance was like burning coals of fire, like the appearance of torches moving to and fro among the living creatures. And the fire was bright, and out of the fire went forth lightning.”

25 But first he must suffer many things and be rejected by this generation.

Here, δεῖ (must) denotes divine necessity, emphasizing that suffering is integral to Jesus’ messianic mission. This counters prevailing messianic expectations of a triumphant, warrior-like deliverer.

Scholars like Joachim Jeremias interpret this as Jesus redefining messiahship through suffering, consistent with the Servant songs of Isaiah (Jeremias, New Testament Theology, p. 290).

Craig A. Evans notes that Jesus’ teachings in this passage, especially his warnings about not following false messiahs or searching for signs, may have been intended to protect his followers from the violent movements that ultimately led to the Jewish-Roman War and the destruction of the Temple. Evans writes, “Jesus’ teachings here anticipate the coming crisis in Jerusalem, urging his followers to remain focused on his words and mission rather than being drawn into nationalistic hopes that would ultimately end in tragedy” (Luke, New Cambridge Bible Commentary, p. 264).

N.T. Wright interprets Jesus’ warnings in Luke 17 as a broader critique of Jewish expectations for a triumphant messianic age centered around the Temple and Jerusalem’s political fortunes. He suggests that Jesus was signaling that God’s kingdom would arrive in unexpected ways— through his ministry and suffering, not through a political or military revolt centered in Jerusalem. Wright states, “The destruction of the Temple would be seen as both a judgment on Israel’s misguided hopes and a redefinition of God’s kingdom as something not tied to the Temple’s physical presence” (Jesus and the Victory of God, p. 338).

Joel B. Green highlights how Jesus’ eschatological teachings prepare his disciples to avoid the fate that would befall Jerusalem. He explains that “the kingdom’s coming is not tied to the survival or destruction of the Temple but to the person and mission of Jesus himself.” Green argues that Jesus’ message reorients his followers’ focus away from the Temple as the epicenter of God’s activity and toward the revelation of the Son of Man in his return (The Gospel of Luke, p. 633).

Darrell Bock also sees an implicit connection to the Temple’s eventual destruction, interpreting Jesus’ words as a caution against associating the kingdom of God with earthly institutions or political power, like the Temple in Jerusalem. Bock writes, “Jesus’ followers are being encouraged to understand that God’s work will not hinge on the Temple or Jewish political sovereignty; instead, the kingdom would manifest through a new community centered on Jesus’ teachings and presence” (Luke, Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament, p. 1411).

A quick summary, the Kingdom is already here but those present cannot perceive it through their natural senses. Some period of time is coming after the Son of Man suffers where visible signs will be visible to the senses but his disciples will not see them, implying those who are not his disciples will see these signs.

Is there an event that was completely visible that the Christians did not witness?

According to Essebius’ Ecclesiastical History

“The people of the church in Jerusalem were commanded by an oracle given by revelation before the war to those in the city who were worthy of it to depart and dwell in one of the cities of Perea which they called Pella. To it those who believed on Christ migrated from Jerusalem…” (Ecclesiastical History 3.5.3).

Josephsus the Jewish historian wrote this of the events in 70 AD

“Thus there was a star resembling a sword, which stood over the city, and a comet that continued a whole year. … So these publicly declared that this signal foreshowed the desolation that was coming upon them. Besides these, a few days after that feast, on the one-and twentieth day of the month Artemisius, a certain prodigious and incredible phenomenon appeared … which I suppose would seem a fable, were it not related by those that saw it … before sun-setting, chariots and troops of soldiers in their armor were seen running about among the clouds, and surrounding of cities.” Citation: Josephus, The Jewish War, 6.300-30